ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Evaluating the performance of the MSKCC gastric cancer survival calculator in the Turkish population.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) nomogram was developed to predict survivorship in gastric cancer patients undergoing R0 resection. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive power of this nomogram in the Turkish patient population. Materials and methods: Gastric cancer patients over 18 years of age who were admitted to our clinic between 2000 and 2019 and underwent primary curative surgery and R0 resection were included in the study. The 5- and 9-year overall survival (OS) rates of 489 patients were analyzed. Real-life survival rates and those calculated using the MSKCC tool were compared in all the patients and subgroups. The relationship between the variables and survival were analyzed. Results: The 5-year median observed OS rate for all the patients was 51.7%, while the 5-year median OS rate calculated using the MSKCC tool was 48.5%. The difference between the expected and observed survival rates was 3.2%. The rates were similar and there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.31). The 9-year median observed OS rate for all the patients was 41.4%, while the 5-year median OS rate calculated using the MSKCC tool was 41%. The difference between the expected and observed survival rates was 0.4%. The rates were similar and there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.9). Conclusion: The 5- and 9-year survival rates estimated using the MSKCC tool were correlated with the 5- and 9-year survival rates in the real-life data. Hence, the use of the MSKCC prognostic tool in clinical practice should be expanded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.